Since I was driving to Denver yesterday, I was unable to participate in the “Kiss-in” at the Hollywood Chick-fil-A. Had I been in town, I may well have joined in, having fun by finding a fetching fellow to kiss in front of the franchise, then walking into the restaurant and buying him a nice chicken meal, while ordering a nice cup of their most refreshing lemonade for myself.
Given some of the photos (via Instapundit) I saw from the “Kiss-In”, it seems that most protesters were more interested in expressing themselves than in presenting a positive image of same-sex affection. Yeah, a three-person kiss and signs like “Eat More Carpet” will go a long way to changing social conservative attitudes toward gays.
Now, these folks were surely having fun. One thing that’s great about America is that they are free to express so flamboyantly their opposition to the views of the chicken chain’s president.
But, just as such flamboyant displays of disagreement likely will make it more challenging to change minds, so too is labeling opposition to gay marriage as “hate” little likely to foster dialogue. According to the Los Angeles Times, the Rev. Sarah Halverson of Fairview Community Church did just that, saying she
. . . respects [Chick-fil-A President Dan] Cathy’s right to free speech, she said, but also exercised her own right to speak out against what she considers hate speech.
“We have the right to stand in disagreement with another’s speech,” she said.
At a Chick-fil-A in Torrance where vandals painted the words “Tastes Like Hate” on the side of the restaurant Thursday night, the “National Same-Sex Kiss Day” was off to a slow start.
She’s does have the right to stand in disagreement. That said, we should also consider whether the way we stand causes those with whom we disagree to reconsider their views. Calling those views “hate speech” is not likely to effect such reconsideration. If anything, it may cause them to double down in disagreement.
NB: Tweaked the conclusion to improve its flow.
FROM THE COMMENTS: Just Me finds it to be a shame that some utilize the confrontational tactics, “because I think gays would get much further by engaging in legitimate debate than the in your face, deliberately provocative displays that don’t pay any respect to the other opinion or with any attempt to find common ground.”